You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Also, the function definitions are loose, vague, or varied enough to mistake one combination of functions for another.

Exactly.

"Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

"Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

Which is why strict function order theory.... is bullshit, basically. If someone is borderline J/P, or even flips, they aren't going to turn into some bi-polar person with all their function uses switching.

And not all types are going to use the same 4 top functions the most, in the same order. MBTI and functions are like two different systems, almost. They don't always or even usually fit together.

Well, what one basically sees in the MBTI, is a kind of psychometric abomination. It's like a personality trait theory molded and painted into looking like a personality type theory. The results can be ugly.

Go to sleep, iguana.

_________________________________INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

I don't agree that we only posses 4 functions, and I'd guess the majority of people now believe that we all posses 8 functions.

Less fashionably, I reject the "cognitive functions based typing" in favour of "behaviour based" way of typing.

Even the 8-function models will show a clear distinction between INTP and INTJ, because either Ti+Ne will heavily overshadow Ni+Te in your cognition, or vice versa.

I've amended my position on this to allow for occasional use of shadow functions, but they still pale in comparison to the overwhelming influence of the top two.

So yes, you can use all eight sometimes, but being INTx would imply that Ne, Ni, Te and Ti are all equally strong and equally valued to you, which is virtually impossible. All the "x" really means is, "I don't know enough about this to know which one I am"--it doesn't mean you're literally 50/50 between INTP and INTJ.

What do you mean by "behavior based" way of typing?

Originally Posted by greed

Also, the function definitions are loose, vague, or varied enough to mistake one combination of functions for another.

I was under the impression that the Jung/Lenore functional definitions are generally accepted here, but maybe not.

If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?

This isn't what I was lead to belive, for example doesn't Lenore Thomson argue that an INTP's tertiary fourth functions are Fi and Se, just like an INTJ, whereas according to most theories, those would be Si and Fe...

No, she doesn't... not unless she's made a major revision of her ideas. (Which is possible, I don't know if she's released new substantial editions.)

Maybe you got confused with her discussion of the "right-brain alternatives" which she lists right under her secondary function in the chart on page 294, which includes Fi and Se. She covers these "crows nest" functions on page 89, claiming these are the first two functions we turn to when our convention primary+secondary don't pan out.

This seems more a theoretical approach by her (ironically, something you shy away from). I think it sounds "logical" to say that (for example) if your Te + Ni is not getting the results you want, you might try to switch to Fe + Si (since you're still pairing a Je and Pi function together and operating in the REALMS you're comfortable with), but I don't know if this is actually true.

I know for me, my two crow's nest functions are actually my two least-developed functions and I saved them for last in terms of development.

So to be honest, I simply chose INTX because I found it preferable to the kind of excessively introspective "what functions am I using threads", which provoke two effects in me:

Based on this and your continuing response, I gotta say you read as far more traditional "INTJ" to me. *shrug*

That I judge myself as INTX because my behaviour is sometimes J and sometimes P.

Why not XXXX then? Because I'm sure sometimes you are thinking and sometimes feeling, sometimes introverted and sometimes extroverted, sometimes intuitive and sometimes sensing.... especially if you are going by a "behavioral" and not a cognitive-function model.

How can you assign yourself an MBTI code at all if you're not using MBTI rules to determine what you are? It's just a little perplexing.

I don't consider my observations interesting or original enough to merit a thread.

Oh well -- I did. But whatever.

"Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

“Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

Even the 8-function models will show a clear distinction between INTP and INTJ, because either Ti+Ne will heavily overshadow Ni+Te in your cognition, or vice versa.

I've amended my position on this to allow for occasional use of shadow functions, but they still pale in comparison to the overwhelming influence of the top two.

So yes, you can use all eight sometimes, but being INTx would imply that Ne, Ni, Te and Ti are all equally strong and equally valued to you, which is virtually impossible. All the "x" really means is, "I don't know enough about this to know which one I am"--it doesn't mean you're literally 50/50 between INTP and INTJ.

Dude read the thread!

Regarding the INTX thing. You could have just asked me whether I believe that INTX is a real type or whether I simply can't make my mind up. My answer would be: .yeah I have no problem with INTX being interpreted that way if it makes you happy.

However I do find it funny that you think INTX is some extra-special heresy though...I mean, a lot of people say they are INXP, but yet, according to your opinions, and INTP doesn't even have Fi and an INFP doesn't even have Ti (at least, you recently said you believe in the 4 functions theory). So, anyone saying INXP is actually being pretty ridiculous to accoridng to that logic, or in fact, anyone with any X in their type!

My point being - either the theory doesn't work especially well, or, there is some great explanation for all this which I haven't read yet, and am open to being linked to.

"Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

"Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

However I do find it funny that you think INTX is some extra-special heresy though...I mean, a lot of people say they are INXP, but yet, according to your opinions, and INTP doesn't even have Fi and an INFP doesn't even have Ti (at least, you recently said you believe in the 4 functions theory). So, anyone saying INXP is actually being pretty ridiculous to accoridng to that logic, or in fact, anyone with any X in their type!

lol @ use of the term "heresy"

Nobody is going to burn you at the stake here, buddy--don't get too excited.

Actually you're pretty accurate here; the only letter that really makes sense as an X is the E/I digit, because it only changes which of the top two functions is preferred over the other....it doesn't actually change the preferred functions themselves as the other letters do.

So yes, INxP is ridiculous too and simply indicates that the person doesn't know whether he gravitates Ti/Fe or Fi/Te....but at least it agrees on an Introverted Judgment+Extroverted Perception structure, and sets Ne and Si as the definite preferred perception functions.

Having an X for P/J doesn't even do that. That's why INTx is even more nonsensical than an X anywhere else--it doesn't define any preferred functions.

Originally Posted by tcda

My point being - either the theory doesn't work especially well, or, there is some great explanation for all this which I haven't read yet, and am open to being linked to.